|
Complications (ISSN 2813-4966) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the prevention, diagnosis, etiology, and management of complications in all aspects of basic, translational, and clinical research, as well as epidemiology. The journal seeks to offer best practices and expert experience, and recommendations on intraoperative and postoperative adverse events, published quarterly online by MDPI.
Complications aims to establish best-practice and expert opinion recommendations on intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. Authors are tasked with addressing four components of perioperative adverse events: (1) assessment, (2) reporting, (3) analysis of possibly anticipable factors (patients, disease, and surgical characteristics that might have an impact on the surgical and anesthesiological adverse events) and (4) management.
This information is of considerable interest, and its practical usability might have important implications for academic and clinical practice. Editors and reviewers should suggest assessing and reporting as an outcome of interest for quality and training purposes. The choice of the correct outcome reporting tool is of paramount importance, and failing to choose the appropriate system could potentially lead to reporting data that are far from reality. Surgeons should prioritize assessing and reporting adverse events to standardize their management. Ultimately, these efforts will uncover the true impact of these events on patients’ perioperative course. Complications publishes reviews, regular research papers (articles), short communications, case reports, but other article types will also be considered. |
Complications (ISSN 2813-4966) is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the prevention, diagnosis, etiology, and management of complications in all aspects of basic, translational, and clinical research, as well as epidemiology. The journal seeks to offer best practices and expert experience, and recommendations on intraoperative and postoperative adverse events, published quarterly online by MDPI.
Measuring the quality of health care delivery has been a crucial point of interest for policymakers due to the increasing demand and cost of health care. These quality metrics are typically based on outcomes data; this data must be standardized and reproducible. Further, these metrics inform hospital training initiatives, compensation profit margins, and insurance reimbursement, which may ultimately impact the quality-of-care delivery and total costs. To that end, one essential component of evaluating quality outcomes for surgeries is negative outcomes, such as adverse events (AEs).
Almost 20 years ago, Martin et al. reviewed the available reporting systems used for surgical adverse events to establish a possible change in attitude towards the reporting of complications using standardized systems. After that, the Clavien–Dindo system was proposed to improve the reporting of postoperative adverse events, their effect and complications, and now is currently widely used for the reporting of complications related to surgical interventions. More recently, to address the gaps in intraoperative adverse events reporting, the Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) global surgical collaboration project was established to offer recommendations for the development and implementation of future reporting systems that are focused on the intraoperative surgical and anesthesiological outcome.
Complications aims to establish best-practice and expert opinion recommendations on intraoperative and postoperative adverse events. Authors are tasked with addressing four components of perioperative adverse events: (1) assessment, (2) reporting, (3) analysis of possibly anticipable factors (patients, disease, and surgical characteristics that might have an impact on the surgical and anesthesiological adverse events) and (4) management.
This information is of considerable interest, and its practical usability may have important implications for academic and clinical practice. Editors and reviewers should suggest assessing and reporting as an outcome of interest for quality and training purposes. The choice of the correct outcome reporting tool is of paramount importance, and failing to choose the appropriate system could potentially lead to reporting data that are far from reality. Surgeons should prioritize assessing and reporting adverse events to standardize their management. Ultimately, these efforts will uncover the true impact of these events on patients’ perioperative course. Complications publishes reviews, regular research papers (articles) and short communications. |
